Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3 (some duplicates have been removed)
only dealt with twice before in history. when the votes for chuck hagel were tallied in the senate, democrats were essentially just one short. republican senators pat cochran, susan collins, johanns and murkowski sided with the president. >> the notion that we would see an unprecedented filibuster, just about unprecedented -- we've never had a secretary of defense filibustered before. they seem to think that the rule now is that you have to have 60 votes for everything. well, that's not the rule. >> senate majority harry reid suggested it's pure politics. >> i guess to be able to run for the senate as a republican in most places of the country, you need to have a resume that says, i help filibuster one of president's nominees. maybe that helps. maybe that keeps the tea party guy from running against you. but this should not be politics. >> senator john mccain's response to politics, you played politics, too. >> in 1989 they filibustered or basically stopped him from coming to the floor of the senate. we didn't have a secretary of defense for three months. it didn't seem to bother h
. lindsey graham has just said he will lock the nomination. >> i plan to vote against chuck hagel. anyone who has watched his testimony saw testimony that was weak and wobbly and can't feel great confidence in chuck hagel in the role as secretary of defense. when you look at his long history and statements he continueses to crack dict himself. >> do you believe he'll be conformed? >> we are looking for more information. we have suggested that a number of additional speech that is we want to read that he's given, sources of income we want to delve into, and we're still looking for that information. >> do you agree with critics who say it is unprecedented the kind of information you have been asking for, that no nominee previously has been asked to provide the depth and breadth of the information you are requesting? >> this is somebody who will be advising the president of the united states on using force, sending troops to war. it's important that the second tear of defense by something fully vetted. i have significant questions and i want to make sure the american people get to know for s
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3 (some duplicates have been removed)